Anyone remember Howard Dean and his fifty-state plan? Dean was a 2004 presidential candidate, and is remembered primarily for his insistence that Democrats should run candidates everywhere–that failing to mount campaigns even in heavily gerrymandered districts that were sure losers was a strategic error.
I agreed with Dean then, and I’m even more convinced of the wisdom of his advice now. As I’ve repeatedly noted, gerrymandering is a vote suppression tactic. Failure to even offer an alternative candidate is participation in that suppression.
For a long time, most voters remained unaware of the effects of gerrymandering (for that matter, most voters remain unaware of the extent to which America’s obsolete electoral systems subvert democracy). Raising that awareness is the first step toward countering and correcting those systems, so I was encouraged to read about a campaign in North Carolina recently profiled in the Washington Post.
The article was titled “She’s running with all she’s got for a seat she can’t win. That’s the point.”
Kate Barr is a blur of activity on the campaign trail this fall. She’s a fixture at local Democratic events, delivering fiery stump speeches. In her neighborhood here in the North Carolina Piedmont, many lawns display her Barbie-pink yard signs. She has branded T-shirts and sweatshirts and glittery stickers.
Wherever she appears, her opening salvo is always the same: “Hi. I’m Kate Barr. And I’m your losing candidate for state Senate District 37.”
Barr’s campaign is making a serious point: aggressive gerrymandering erases competitive elections and leaves voters without a real choice. North Carolina is a competitive state. It has a Democratic governor. But thanks to gerrymandering, it has a Republican super-majority in its legislature. (This will sound familiar to Indiana voters…) During the last round of redistricting, the legislature redrew Barr’s previous district, marrying the suburban area she lived in with a reliably rural, Red district. (Again, Indiana residents can relate…)
Davidson went from being part of a district centered in Mecklenburg County — where Donald Trump lost by 35 percentage points in 2020 — to being part of Iredell, which he won by about the same amount.
“Why am I losing?” Barr asked, warming up the crowd at a community center in her district ahead of a campaign appearance by Democratic gubernatorial candidate Josh Stein one recent day. “In a gerrymandered state like North Carolina, it means representatives are choosing their voters instead of voters choosing their representatives.”
The article concedes that Barr’s decision to build her entire campaign around certain defeat is “unconventional,” noting that–among other things–she sells a “LOSER” T-shirt on her campaign website. But it also notes that–shades of Howard Dean!– “the strategy of running Democrats in districts in which they are sure to be beaten has spread across the country after decades of ceding state legislative races to Republicans.”
Both parties draw district lines to their partisan advantage — a tactic known as gerrymandering. But about twice as many state legislatures overly favor Republicans compared with Democrats, according to a 2023 study by the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.
Running “sure loser” candidates and giving the “sure loser” voters a reason to come to the polls has been shown to improve the performance of the top of the ticket. It makes the majority party spend time and money they wouldn’t otherwise have to spend. And if focuses on a result of gerrymandering that has been aptly called “a highway to extremism.” That’s because gerrymandering acts to magnify a state’s partisan advantage.
The effect has been on particularly vivid display in some red states in recent years as legislators who have little to fear from a general election pass laws that are to the right of what their voters might support, experts say. Reproductive rights restrictions, school book bans and voting limitations have gone largely unchecked at the ballot box. Meanwhile, policies with wide support, like certain anti-gun violence laws, have gone nowhere.
You can see that extremism in Barr’s sure-to-win opponent.
Barr’s opponent, incumbent state senator Vickie Sawyer, who ran unopposed in 2022, has supported policies such as North Carolina’s 12-week abortion ban — which was enacted after the legislature overrode the governor’s veto — and constraints on discussing sexual orientation in elementary schools. At a recent forum on aging, Sawyer brought up unprompted her support for a bill that would require sheriffs to detain undocumented immigrants who have been charged with a crime, even if they have made bail — “so they can’t kill our children,” she said.
Sawyer sounds a lot like the culture warriors in Indiana’s legislature.
The good news for Hoosiers is that statewide candidates can’t be gerrymandered. The current GOP statewide candidates are worse than Sawyer, but they can–and must– be defeated.
Professor-well said…..very well said. Hopefully, Hoosiers will read this, understand this and work towards its implementation. State Representative Carey Hamilton is leading an effort similar to this and, she’s making progress.
As usual, Professor, thanks for your thoughts.
I remember a Primary Election a few years ago when I learned of it when I got an E-mail from a candidate seeking a donation. I asked Sheila why there hadn’t been Primary information on the news, her response was that there wasn’t much going on. I received a Thank You comment on here from a man in southern Indiana because he knew nothing about a Primary Election in Indiana till he read my comments. He did look for and found an article in a Louisville, KY newspaper. There has been little improvement since from Democrats; the number of familiar Republicans in office get the free publicity with their questionable decisions. Elections are for sale; Trump has had many millions of dollars a free publicity with his “former president” label, his outlandish lies and his antics and criminal trials.
His current publicity is a continuation of his questionable business tactics and sexual escapades for 40 years. This is a two-edged sword; a legal loophole regarding election laws that is destroying our government and our nation. I am proud of those who choose NOT to run against him by using the same criminal tactics but…we are looking dead in the face of another Trump administration.
The logical thing to do would be to take the task out of the hands of those who so obviously have an interest in taking advantage. But there we have the issue. Logical. Forget fairness and equality, let alone voting rights.
Sheila touched on it in her post, but I wonder what elections would be like in Indiana without the excessive partisan gerrymandering. With the invention of AI and our high-tech world, we could eliminate the partisan ritual of rigging the districts by feeding voting information into a computer and letting the machine divide the districts. It’s the same for voting in this country. It’s almost as if the parties don’t want to replace their antiquated systems with newer ones they cannot game. 😉
I’m unsure I’d be running as a “losing candidate” during an election. One year, I ran for City Council against a veteran D, who had been serving for years but had no mind of her own. She voted the way the party head told her to vote. I almost beat her in the primary after working my tail off.
Afterward, they did the redistricting magic and placed her in a more secure district, and mine became red as it could be. I ran against our Tea Party mayor, serving his second term. It wasn’t even close! I had more people canvassing against me than walking for me. I had both Ball Hospital and Ball State University in my district. Neither of which liked my reporting on the Ball family oligarchs. LOL
Because I am aware of the parties’ rigging of the system, I am nervous about the certification process for the upcoming election. We may witness dozens of lawsuits in states refusing to certify election results for POTUS. If Trump appointed some judges when he was president, would they have to recuse themselves? Like with the corrupt SCOTUS, I don’t see them doing the right thing.
I have already sent in my absentee ballot, and I was disappointed by the number of offices in Hamilton County where candidates are unopposed. Disappointed isn’t even a strong enough word. “Distressed” is probably a better word.
Good blog and good comments.
Until Indiana Democratic organizations become more open to everyone who wants to be involved, promote Democratic tickets, and run for offices; and until Democrats in Indiana are willing to vote, because when we all vote we win; there isn’t going to be any change or betterment in Indiana. Even though Republicans are more than happy to dominate by taking whatever actions they want without equality involved on every level, Democrats have actually voted for and won high offices here. But just try to be involved in Indiana offices without being an “acceptable” tradition in the Democratic Party here. It’s not going to happen. That’s why Democrats aren’t competative with Republicans here. Speaking from experience and the experiences of friends who have been very lively and dedicated enough to try to be more involved, it’s just not a conducive party that keeps everything open to everyone who wants to be involved and has the availability to do so. Most people only have situations when they are available for limited periods of time. Whether because they just retired and are aging, are unemployed and want to pursue political office, or a variety of other reasons. The party has to be ready, willing, and able to receive people when people are available to make this work. And Democrat voters need to pay attention to this issue too in order to help make it happen as much and often as possible. Life-long electees are rare, so swing the doors wide open and just see what happens for once.
The current systems, obviously, support those already in power. I find it hard to believe that sooo many people do not kn ow this, or, if they do, do not care.
I recall being at a State House hearing about the most recent redistricting at which a conservative businessman reported that he cannot get the attention of even conservative Republican legislators because they don’t have worry about being re-elected. They are free to ignore the interests of even their supporters. Gerrymandering hurts ALL voters.
Republicans who find their safe district representatives don’t listen to them – might be interested in rank choice voting.
I have sent large contributions to the Democratic candidates for Governor, Senate, and Attorney General along with my street address, email, and phone number volunteering to campaign. The checks were cashed two months ago. I am still waiting to receive any acknowledgement from any of the campaigns. Not even a bumper sticker (which would help their visibility). Do they even want to win?